Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 09:41:23 +0200 From: "Cyrille Lefevre" <clefevre-lists@9online.fr> To: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net>, "Christian Hiris" <4711@chello.at> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bind timeouts Message-ID: <01f401c43cab$853edc20$7890a8c0@dyndns.org> References: <0cc701c43704$fe189fc0$7890a8c0@dyndns.org> <200405110321.i4B3LFGI073037@bunrab.catwhisker.org> <20040511093634.GA41727@gits.dyndns.org> <200405180814.15854.4711@chello.at> <20040518063753.GB2038@over-yonder.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 08:14:04AM +0200 I heard the voice of > Christian Hiris, and lo! it spake thus: > > > > As far as i know MX records _must_ have an A record. > > RFC1035 states: > MX records cause type A additional section processing for the host > specified by EXCHANGE. The use of MX RRs is explained in detail > in [RFC-974]. > > RFC974 says: > There is one other special case. If the response contains an > answer which is a CNAME RR, it indicates that REMOTE is actually > an alias for some other domain name. The query should be repeated > with the canonical domain name. > > RFC2821 obsoletes 974, but says substantially the same in regards to > CNAME's. So, by the RFC's it's allowed. > > > For me, I think it's a bad practice. But, hey... not necesserally, an mx could point to a cname which is an rr record :) which could explain why this is allowed. google search : bind "in mx" http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch8/mx.html http://www.zytrax.com/books/dns/ch9/rr.html Cyrille Lefevre. -- home: mailto:cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01f401c43cab$853edc20$7890a8c0>